Well, I still am not convinced about the usefulness of the I-Touch. I looked up the price. Each costs approximately $230.00. For an average class of students (29-30) that would be a total cost of (approximately) $6,670.00. I did some further calculations and determined that for the same price, you could purchase between 7-10 basic notebook computers and one interactive smartboard and projector. If you already have a projector -- BONUS! you can buy up to two additional computers. Or you could buy one less computer and add a couple of high quality microphones and a portable video camera/digital camera.
In the case of both I-Touch and Notebook computers, I did not calculate any savings based on bulk purchase or educational discounts. The price of the smart board is based on an educational discount for public schools in North America. Neither cost calculation included maintenance, IT support or taxes...but all of these costs would be involved for either system.
So, what does this mean? The I-touch has very limited uses. Sure, you can download applets, record, and access the internet but there are none of the other great features of having a real computer including the ability to create blogs and websites, desktop publishing, photo editing, etc. Additionally, these have very limited uses for whole class instruction. I for one, would take JUST an interactive smart board any day over equipping each student with an I-Touch. If I could use the same amount of money to also purchase 7-10 laptops I would much rather do that based on the versatility of a real computer vs. an I-touch. If anyone else has a set of different calculations or arguments for the benefits of I-touch over laptop/notebook please share them with me.
Hi Lauren,
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this! I've been raising that question of how we spend tech money, so thanks for putting some figures out there to take that further.
So, what kind of teaching is most effective for the most kids in our very diverse classrooms?
That question should always drive tech purchases.
Is it best for kids to most often have class doing the same thing at the same time, all directed by a teacher at the front of the room? so that learning is mainly listening and watching?
Then schools should definitely invest thousands of dollars in white boards (though you can many of the same things with a tablet and projector for thousands less).
Or do we want to shift a bit with mostly teachers talking in front of the room to a whole class at once with only occasionally enrichment by sending kids to their turn at a computer instead of the usual routine of working on paper?
Then the white board/one computer for every 4 or 5 kids would work. Kids would actually get to touch a computer maybe 3 or 4 times a week -- far below the access that many kids have outside of school, and not nearly enough for kid who have no access outside of school, but it's a model that many school use.
(Because of their small memory and speek nebooks do really do sort of a mediocre job of much of what you say you want computers to do, and thus sales are really starting to drop. I'm not seeing a lot of schools buying netbooks - handhelds, desktops, and laptops seem much more often chosen).
Do you want to reduce the time that teachers spend talking to the whole class at once and have kids more engaged in their own research, their own differentiated skill development, language development that each might need? The ability, at their desk, to explore much further than a lesson went or to back up to review the lesson a many times as necessary (because they have audio and visuals from the lesson right there at their desk?)
Then we go to one-to-one computing, as the state of Maine does, as Lake Washington SD is heading, as Shoreline does starting in middle school, and as teachers like the writer of the Learning is Messy blog (in a Title 1 school) has done (there are many more examples, but you get the picture).
And then the costs come down to laptops for everyone (take a lot of room and are costly) or handhelds. Or a combination so that as in the workplace, learners have access to technology when they have a need to use it.
But the teaching decisions have to come first.
FYI: a number of the X11 people are blogging from their Touch (as do I from my Iphone), and you might want to check out the Photoshop App that's really pretty good.
On the new Touches that came out the week after ours shifted, you can also take and edit really high quality video (for about the same price as a stand-alone video camera).
No school eliminates all laptops/ desktops when they they go to handhelds. They go together.
But the question is whether technology is mainly in the teacher's hands, or if we shift the technology to the children's hands so that much more differentiation can happen.
(and training costs for smart boards are very high, while minimal for other options. The hundreds of smart boards going unused in classroom in our region are testament to this).
Apple does offer pretty substantive educator discounts.
Here are some thoughts about these sorts of tech choices from a former North Carolina Teacher of the Year (he doesn't list handhelds but has written about how he advocates using the cell phones that his students bring to school) but has great ideas here):
http://bit.ly/aIfstI
http://bit.ly/cAA8gQ
Thanks for starting this conversation about how we make technology choices with limited budgets!
Jane
You'd think I could have gotten it all in in my long comment!
ReplyDeleteOn the netbooks, costs of software is important: Decent photo editing (love that you want to do that) is going to run at least $75 per machine.
Likely, you'd need to buy bundled Office -- depending on discounts, about $100.
And others? Hardware is only part of the costs of tech.
Which makes free and very cheap apps a good deal for schools.
J
Hi Jane,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments. You raise some interesting points. I wonder about the whole class vs. individualized learning model that you describe. Differentiation is important in certain contexts but I guess my question is whether it is practical and do-able in all cases. Is the whole class model truly as bad as the bandwagon would have us believe? I guess I am always in favor of moderation in everything. There is a purpose and place for whole class instruction, small groups, and individualized instruction etc. I am not sure it is necessary or reasonable (or a mark of good instruction) to expect teachers to individualize everything for every student. It would be a very inefficient way to teach and with class sizes as they currently are in most public schools, I don't see how it would work.
I went to Evergreen which is an alternative college in Olympia. I loved it and my experience there has been extremely influential in how I view the possibilities for education. At Evergreen, there is whole class instruction, seminars, small groups and differentiation. There is a large individual interest/ self driven component which is very motivating (or was for me...the model doesn't work for everyone). Yet, they do not eschew whole class instruction. I think one of the issues today is assuming that there are no "experts" who have knowledge to impart to others -- the whole "the earth is flat" model. How can this be? If someone has spent their life studying in a certain subject area, I would certainly hope they know more than someone who has never "cracked a book" on the subject. I am not going to take my medical problems to an amateur with access to the internet. I am going to take my problem to a doctor who has studied, practiced and has experience.
I also think it is important to think about the "gradual release of responsibility" model. In Kindergarten and the First Grade having students doing research on the iTouch as THE primary means of instruction seems ludicrous. The integration and use of technology will be different at different grade levels. I am currently in a first grade class as my main placement. My Mentor Teacher is an excellent teacher and she has a nice balance between whole class, small group and individual work. Given this and all of the curriculum that teachers are given it is difficult to differentiate at all much less to be expected to do it all the time.